Hydrologic and Thermal Conditions of the Eastbank · PDF fileHydrologic and Thermal Conditions...
1
Hydrologic and Thermal Conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer System near Rocky Reach Dam, Douglas County, Washington Marijke van Heeswijk and Stephen E. Cox, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington Introduction The Eastbank Aquifer system is located in a river-terrace deposit along the Columbia River upstream of Rocky Reach Dam. It is recharged primarily by the Columbia River and provides water to a fish hatchery and a regional water system serving the cities of Wenatchee, East Wenatchee, and parts of unincorporated Chelan and Douglas Counties. In 2006, mean annual pumpage by the hatchery (CT well field) and regional water system (RW well field) was about 43 and 16 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) (19,000 and 7,200 gallons per minute, gal/min), respectively (van Heeswijk and others, 2008). Successful hatchery operation requires cool water for raising salmonid species and concerns over increasing groundwater temperatures were the reason for this study. The study objectives were improving the understanding of (1) the hydrologic and thermal conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer system and (2) the processes that affect those conditions. The study was conducted in cooperation with Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County (Chelan PUD). Study Location R o c k Islan d C r e e k B e a v e r C r e e k E n t i a t L a k e S w a ka n e C r e e k E n t i a t R iver R o a r i n g Cre e k W e n atch e e R ive r C o l u m b i a R i v e r Rocky Reach Dam Lincoln Rock State Park Study area Turtle Rock Island Wenatchee Entiat East Wenatchee Waterville CHELAN DOUGLAS GRANT 285 28 2 97 D o ugla s C r e e k 2 2 97 97 28 0 5 MILES 0 8 KILOMETERS WASHINGTON C a 720 720 740 740 760 760 760 760 720 720 740 740 760 760 740 740 TH6 TH5 TH4 TH2 RIV CT2 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD10 CD8 CD6 North Weir South Weir LR1 LR2-E LR2-W RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT4 TH8 CD47 SW14 SW13 SW11 12453679 CT well field CT well field 0 1,000 FEET 0 300 METERS Well, weir, or river site and site name Subsurface cutoff wall Approximate park boundary Well field RW4 Eastbank Hatchery USGS gaging station and number Land-surface contour—Shows altitude of ground surface. Contour interval 20 feet. 12453679 EXPLANATION 720 2 97 LR well field RW well field SW well field Rocky Reach Dam Boat ramp Lincoln Rock State Park C O LU M BIA RIVE R Hydrogeologic Framework and Hydrology The Eastbank Aquifer system consists of largely unconsolidated sedimentary units that overlay Late Cretaceous metamorphic bedrock of biotite gneiss (Tabor and others, 1987). The units form the Lower and Upper Aquifers (glaciofluvial gravels and sands) and the Combined Aquifer where the Clay Confining Unit (lacustrine silts and clays) is absent in the northwestern part of the study area. Groundwater pumpage is from the Lower and Combined Aquifers, which have very large transmissivities ranging up to 1,700,000 square feet per day (ft 2 /d) (Robinson and Noble, Inc., as reported by CH2M Hill, 1977). The Lower Aquifer became a confined aquifer when the reservoir (Lake Entiat) formed at the completion of Rocky Reach Dam in 1961 and water levels in the river were raised almost 100 feet. A subsurface cutoff wall that extends east from the dam across the terrace deposits and down to bedrock maintains water levels in the Upper and Lower Aquifers, but some groundwater seepage occurs. Post-dam, predevelopment flow in the Lower and Combined Aquifers was generally parallel to the river, from northeast to southwest. With the pumping of large-capacity wells installed in 1983 (RW well field) and 1989 (CT well field), flow directions have changed toward the RW and CT well fields. Hydrogeologic Cross Section 697.0 695.0 693.0 693.0 695.0 694.7 694.5 691.0 (693.1) (694.5) 694.3 694.8 694.6 695.1 694.7 689.9 696.7 (698.5) 695.1 695.0 694.7 LR1 LR2-E TH2 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT2 CD6 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD10 TH6 TH5 TH8 CD8 LR2-W CT3 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 TH4 CT1 CT4 702.76 702.76 702.36 702.36 702.08 702.08 702.12 702.12 702.31 702.31 LR1 LR2-E LR2-W TH5 TH4 TH2 702.56 702.56 TH8 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 CD6 CD10 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD8 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT2 CT4 TH6 705.8 702.7 702.7 702.6 702.6 702.5 702.5 702.4 702.4 702.3 702.3 702.2 702.2 702.1 702.1 702.0 702.0 TH3 C O L U M BIA RIV E R 704.5 0 1,000 FEET 0 300 METERS Groundwater Flow with Pumping, July 18, 2007 Post-dam Predevelopment Groundwater Flow C O L U M BIA RIV E R Less permeable units Permeable units Bedrock Upper Aquifer Full-pool level of Lake Entiat Natural low water level prior to construction of Rocky Reach Dam Lower Aquifer Clay Confining Unit Bedrock Columbia River / Lake Entiat Northwest Southeast NOT TO SCALE Modified from Robinson and Noble, Inc., as reported by CH2M Hill (1977). 2 97 EXPLANATION Subsurface cutoff wall Well pumping Direction of ground-water flow TH8 694.8 Well and name—Italicized number is measured water level, in feet. Values in parentheses represent water levels for the Upper Aquifer, Clay Confining Unit, or an unknown unit Extent of Lower and Combined Aquifers— Modified from Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc. (1990) River water level, in feet—Mean water level measured at USGS gaging station 12453679 from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m., July 19, 1977 (post-dam, predevelopment), or from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., July 18, 2007. 705.8 697 697 Potentiometric contour—Modified from Robinson and Noble, Inc., as reported by CH2M Hill (1977). Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells, 8:30 a.m., July 19, 1977. Contour interval 0.1 foot. Post-dam, Predevelopment Groundwater Flow 697 697 Potentiometric contours prior to shutdown of pumping wells—Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells (July 18, 2007). Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval, in feet, is variable. Groundwater Flow with Pumping, July 18, 2007 Historical Water-Level and Temperature Monitoring The Chelan PUD has monitored water levels and temperatures in wells and the Columbia River (Lake Entiat) hourly since 1990. Limited verification of measurements and instrument drift made the accuracy of water levels uncertain and they were not analyzed for trends. Water temperatures were reliable and were analyzed. Well and River Temperatures, 2006 TH5 TH6 CT3 LR2-W TH4 TH7 TH8 CD47 TH9 RIV CD8 TH1 CD10 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 DAILY MEDIAN TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS APR MAY MAR JAN FEB JUNE SEPT JULY AUG NOV DEC OCT Selected Vertical Temperature Profiles B. CD47, top of perforated interval at about 560 feet February 22, 1990 February 7, 2006 December 11, 2007 January 28, 2008 August 22, 2007 TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS August 16, 1989 August 31, 1989 November 7, 1989 December 11, 2007 January 28, 2008 August 22, 2007 April 12, 1990 A. CD6, open-end well (no perforations) and no temperature probe C. TH8, open-end well (no perforations) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 6 ? ? ? 8 10 12 14 16 18 8 10 12 14 16 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD 29 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD 29 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD 29 Upper Aquifer Hydrogeologic unit Lower Aquifer Bedrock Clay Confining Unit July 24, 1989 August 16, 1989 October 30, 1989 December 13, 2007 April 12, 1990 January 28, 2008 Temperature profile measured on: Altitude of temperature probe Temperature profile measured on: Temperature profile measured on: Land surface Land surface Land surface Trends in Water Temperatures Most of the Lower and Combined Aquifers indicate increasing interannual trends in temperatures from 1999 through 2006 that correspond to increasing trends in the annual mean and annual maximum temperatures in the Columbia River of 0.07 and 0.17°C per year, respectively. These increases are within the natural variability of the river temperatures. There were no trends in the annual minimum river temperatures during the same period, and there were no trends in the annual minimum, mean, and maximum river temperatures from 1991 through 1998 and from 1991 through 2007. Because most of the Lower and Combined Aquifers reached thermal equilibrium—defined by constant time lags between changes in river temperatures and subsequent changes in groundwater temperatures—prior to 1999 and seasonal pumpage patterns were relatively stable from 1999 through 2006, increasing interannual trends in groundwater temperatures are most likely explained by increasing trends in river temperatures. Annual Maximum Well and River Temperatures 10 12 14 16 18 20 1999 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ANNUAL MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS RIV RIV CD10 CD10 CD47 CD47 CT3 CT3 TH5 TH5 LR2-W LR2-W TH1 TH1 TH4 TH4 TH6 TH6 TH7 TH7 TH8 TH8 TH9 TH9 Temperature probe in river EXPLANATION Temperature probe in Upper Aquifer or Clay Confining Unit Temperature probe in Lower Aquifer or Combined Aquifer Solid line indicates a time series with a statistically significant trend of increasing annual maximum temperatures (α=0.05): Dashed line indicates a time series with no statistically significant trend (α=0.05) River Temperatures 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 WATER TE MPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS 1995 1993 1991 1999 1997 2001 2003 2005 2007 Mean Minimum Maximum Annual water temperature Least-squares regression line of annual maximum temperatures, 1999–2006 Least-squares regression line of annual mean temperatures, 1999–2006 Slope=0.07; r 2 =0.56 Slope=0.17; r 2 =0.61 Trends in Time Lags Between River and Well Temperatures North Weir South Weir 0 1,000 FEET 0 300 METERS 96 / 21 / 28 LR1 LR2-E LR2-W TH5 TH4 TH2 RIV TH8 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 CD6 CD10 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD8 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT2 CT4 TH6 150 / 123 / 96 193 / 142 / 145 67 / 44 / 47 55 / 49 / 53 37 / 2 / 1 119 / 82 / 65 C O L U M BIA RIV E R EXPLANATION Subsurface cutoff wall Statistically significant trend of decreasing time lag of annual minimum or maximum temperatures, 1991–98 (α=0.05) No statistically significant trend of decreasing time lag of annual minimum or maximum temperatures, 1991–98 (α=0.05) Well with time lag of annual maximum temperature in 1991 / 1999 / 2006, in days Well, weir, or river site and name LR1 55 / 49 / 53 α α Conceptual Model Analyses of water-level data collected on July 18, 2007, and dissolved-constituent and bacterial concentrations in samples collected August 20–22, 2007, showed that most of the water pumped by the hatchery (CT well field) recharges along the river at the generally shortest distance between the well field and the river. In addition, analyses of the historical groundwater temperature data showed that at historical pumping rates, water pumped by the hatchery recharged about 2 months prior to the time it was pumped from the aquifer. Generalized Groundwater Flow Directions and Fluxes, 2007 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT2 CT4 North Weir South Weir LR1 LR2-E LR2-W TH6 TH5 TH4 TH2 RIV TH8 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 CD6 CD10 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD8 Well, weir, or river site and site name Subsurface cutoff wall RW4 EXPLANATION General groundwater flow direction in the Lower and Combined Aquifers— Arrow lengths represent relative flux General location of groundwater divide Well of CT well field Well of RW well field Extent of Lower and Combined Aquifers— Modified from Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc. (1990) 0 800 FEET 0 200 METERS C O L U M BIA RIV E R Distribution of Potassium and Live Bacterial Cells, August 20–22, 2007 COLU M BIA RIVER North Weir South Weir LR1 LR2-E LR2-W TH5 TH4 TH2 RIV TH8 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 CD6 CD10 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD8 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT2 CT4 TH6 COLU M BIA RIVER Counts of live bacteria per milliliter of water Potassium, in milligrams per liter ° ° 0.61 1.63 1.04 1.02 1.02 1.48 1.03 North Weir South Weir LR1 LR2-E LR2-W TH5 TH4 TH2 RIV TH8 TH9 TH7 TH1 CD47 CD6 CD10 SW14 SW13 SW11 CD8 RW3 RW4 RW2 RW1 CT1 CT3 CT2 CT4 TH6 1.02 1.61 1.20 1.03 Well, weir, or river site and site name Subsurface cutoff wall RW4 EXPLANATION Sampling site—Number is concentration of potassium or bacterial cells. 450 1,500 88,000 470 1,300 360 390 800 290 <3 0 1,000 FEET 0 300 METERS References Cited CH2M Hill, 1977, Wenatchee Regional Water Supply System predesign report (draft): Prepared for the City of Wenatchee, Washington, about 150 p. Tabor, R.W., Frizzell, V.A., Jr., Whetten, J.T., Waitt, R.B., Swanson, D.A., Byerly, G.R., Booth, D.B., Hetherington, M.J., and Zartman, R.E., 1987, Geologic map of the Chelan 30-minute by 60-minute quadrangle, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series I-1661, 1 plate. van Heeswijk, Marijke, Cox, S.E., Huffman, R.L., and Curran, C.A, 2008, Conceptual model of hydrologic and thermal conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer System near Rocky Reach Dam, Douglas County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5071, 66 p. Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc., 1990, Eastbank Hatchery pumping test and analysis, final report: Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington, about 200 p. Acknowledgments We thank the following PUD personnel for assistance with this study: Ian Adams, Dan Davies, and Sam Dilly for extensive assistance with compilation of data and information and help in the field, Travis Dolge, Tim Doneen, and Tom Whaley for help in the field, and Steve Hays for compilation of historical Rocky Reach Dam forebay temperatures. We also thank Mike Krautkramer and Jim Hay of Robinson, Noble, and Saltbush, Inc. for sharing data and information from their library, Kim deRubertis and Omar Fulton for sharing previous work, and Mike Cockrum, Regional Water Operator of the City of Wenatchee, for sharing historical pumpage data of the regional water system. Contacts Marijke van Heeswijk, [email protected], (253) 552-1625 Stephen E. Cox, [email protected], (253) 552-1623 U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington 934 Broadway, Suite 300, Tacoma, Washington, 98402 http://wa.water.usgs.gov/ U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey April 2009
Transcript of Hydrologic and Thermal Conditions of the Eastbank · PDF fileHydrologic and Thermal Conditions...
Hydrologic and Thermal Conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer System near Rocky Reach Dam, Douglas County, WashingtonMarijke van Heeswijk and Stephen E. Cox, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington
IntroductionThe Eastbank Aquifer system is located in a river-terrace deposit along the Columbia River upstream of Rocky Reach Dam. It is recharged primarily by the Columbia River and provides water to a fish hatchery and a regional water system serving the cities of Wenatchee, East Wenatchee, and parts of unincorporated Chelan and Douglas Counties. In 2006, mean annual pumpage by the hatchery (CT well field) and regional water system (RW well field) was about 43 and 16 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) (19,000 and 7,200 gallons per minute, gal/min), respectively (van Heeswijk and others, 2008). Successful hatchery operation requires cool water for raising salmonid species and concerns over increasing groundwater temperatures were the reason for this study. The study objectives were improving the understanding of (1) the hydrologic and thermal conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer system and (2) the processes that affect those conditions. The study was conducted in cooperation with Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County (Chelan PUD).
Study Location
Rock Island Creek
Beaver Creek
Entia
t L
ake
Swakane Creek
Entiat River
Roaring Creek
Wenatchee River
Colu
mbi
a Ri
ver
RockyReachDam
LincolnRockStatePark
Studyarea Turtle
RockIsland
Wenatchee
Entiat
East Wenatchee
Waterville
CHELAN
DOUGLAS
GRANT
285 28
297
Douglas Creek
2
2
297
97
28
120°25' 120°20' 120°15' 120°10' 120°05' 120° 119°55' 119°50'
47°40'
47°35'
47°30'
47°25'
Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1983, 1:100,000Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 10Horizontal Datum: North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27)
0 5MILES
0 8KILOMETERS
Studyarea
WASHINGTON
Casc
ade
Rang
e
720
720
740
740
760
760
760
760
720720
740740
760760
740740
TH6
TH5
TH4TH2
RIV
CT2
TH9TH7
TH1
CD10CD8CD6
North Weir
South Weir
LR1LR2-ELR2-W
RW3RW4
RW2RW1
CT1
CT3
CT4TH8
CD47SW14SW13SW11
12453679
CTwell field
CTwell field
0 1,000FEET
0 300METERS
Well, weir, or river site and site name
Subsurface cutoff wall
Approximate park boundary
Well field
RW4
Eastbank Hatchery
USGS gaging station and number
Land-surface contour—Showsaltitude of ground surface.Contour interval 20 feet.
12453679
EXPLANATION
720
297
LR well field
RWwell field
SWwell field
RockyReachDam
Boatramp
Lincoln RockState Park
COLUMBIA RIVER
120°17'30"120°18' 120°17' 120°16'30"
47°32'30"
47°31'30"
47°32'
U.S. Forest Service orthophoto,Rocky Reach Dam quad, August 2, 1998
Hydrogeologic Framework and Hydrology The Eastbank Aquifer system consists of largely unconsolidated sedimentary units that overlay Late Cretaceous metamorphic bedrock of biotite gneiss (Tabor and others, 1987). The units form the Lower and Upper Aquifers (glaciofluvial gravels and sands) and the Combined Aquifer where the Clay Confining Unit (lacustrine silts and clays) is absent in the northwestern part of the study area. Groundwater pumpage is from the Lower and Combined Aquifers, which have very large transmissivities ranging up to 1,700,000 square feet per day (ft2/d) (Robinson and Noble, Inc., as reported by CH2M Hill, 1977).
The Lower Aquifer became a confined aquifer when the reservoir (Lake Entiat) formed at the completion of Rocky Reach Dam in 1961 and water levels in the river were raised almost 100 feet. A subsurface cutoff wall that extends east from the dam across the terrace deposits and down to bedrock maintains water levels in the Upper and Lower Aquifers, but some groundwater seepage occurs. Post-dam, predevelopment flow in the Lower and Combined Aquifers was generally parallel to the river, from northeast to southwest. With the pumping of large-capacity wells installed in 1983 (RW well field) and 1989 (CT well field), flow directions have changed toward the RW and CT well fields.
Hydrogeologic Cross Section
697.0
695.
0
693.0
693.0
695.0
694.7
694.5
691.0
(693.1)(694.5)
694.3
694.8694.6695.1
694.7
689.9
696.7
(698.5)
695.1
695.0
694.7
LR1LR2-E
TH2
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT2
CD6
SW14
SW13
SW11
CD10
TH6
TH5
TH8
CD8
LR2-W
CT3
TH9TH7
TH1
CD47
TH4
CT1CT4
702.76702.76
702.36702.36
702.08702.08
702.12702.12
702.31702.31
LR1LR2-ELR2-W
TH5
TH4
TH2
702.56702.56
TH8TH9
TH7
TH1
CD47
CD6
CD10
SW14
SW13
SW11
CD8
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT1
CT3CT2
CT4
TH6
705.8
702.7702.7
702.6702.6
702.5702.5
702.4702.4702.3
702.3702.2702.2
702.1702.1
702.0702.0
120°17'30" 120°17'
47°32'30"
47°32'
120°17'30" 120°17'
TH3
COLU
MBIA
RIV
ER
704.5
0 1,000FEET
0 300METERS
Groundwater Flowwith Pumping,July 18, 2007
Post-damPredevelopmentGroundwater Flow
COLU
MBIA
RIV
ER
Less permeable unitsPermeable units Bedrock
Upper Aquifer
Full-pool levelof Lake Entiat
Natural low water levelprior to constructionof Rocky Reach Dam
Lower AquiferClay Confining Unit
Bedrock
Columbia River /Lake Entiat
Northwest Southeast
NOT TO SCALE Modified from Robinson and Noble, Inc.,as reported by CH2M Hill (1977).
297
EXPLANATION
Subsurface cutoff wall
Well pumping
Direction of ground-water flow
TH8694.8
Well and name—Italicized number is measured water level, in feet. Values in parentheses represent water levels for the Upper Aquifer, Clay Confining Unit, or an unknown unit
Extent of Lower and Combined Aquifers— Modified from Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc. (1990)
River water level, in feet—Mean water level measured at USGS gaging station 12453679 from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m., July 19, 1977 (post-dam,
predevelopment), or from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., July 18, 2007.
705.8
697697 Potentiometric contour—Modified from Robinson and Noble, Inc., as reported by CH2M Hill (1977). Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells, 8:30 a.m., July 19, 1977. Contour interval 0.1 foot.
Post-dam, Predevelopment Groundwater Flow
697697 Potentiometric contours prior to shutdown of pumping wells—Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells
(July 18, 2007). Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval, in feet, is variable.
Groundwater Flow with Pumping, July 18, 2007
Historical Water-Level and Temperature Monitoring The Chelan PUD has monitored water levels and temperatures in wells and the Columbia River (Lake Entiat) hourly since 1990. Limited verification of measurements and instrument drift made the accuracy of water levels uncertain and they were not analyzed for trends. Water temperatures were reliable and were analyzed.
Well and River Temperatures, 2006
TH5TH6
CT3LR2-W
TH4
TH7TH8
CD47
TH9
RIV
CD8
TH1
CD10
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
DAIL
Y M
EDIA
N T
EMPE
RATU
RE, I
N D
EGRE
ES C
ELSI
US
APR MAYMARJAN FEB JUNE SEPTJULY AUG NOV DECOCT
Selected Vertical Temperature Profiles
B. CD47, top of perforated intervalat about 560 feet
February 22, 1990February 7, 2006
December 11, 2007January 28, 2008
August 22, 2007
TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS
TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS
August 16, 1989August 31, 1989November 7, 1989
December 11, 2007January 28, 2008
August 22, 2007April 12, 1990
A. CD6, open-end well (no perforations) and no temperature probe
C. TH8, open-end well (no perforations)
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
6
? ? ?
8 10 12 14 16 188 10 12 14 16
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
ALTI
TUDE
, IN
FEE
T AB
OVE
NGV
D 29
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
ALTI
TUDE
, IN
FEE
T AB
OVE
NGV
D 29
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
ALTI
TUDE
, IN
FEE
T AB
OVE
NGV
D 29
Upper Aquifer
Hydrogeologic unit
Lower AquiferBedrock
Clay Confining Unit
July 24, 1989August 16, 1989October 30, 1989
December 13, 2007April 12, 1990
January 28, 2008
Temperature profile measured on:
Altitude of temperature probe
Temperature profile measured on:
Temperature profile measured on:
Land surface Land surface
Land surface
Trends in Water TemperaturesMost of the Lower and Combined Aquifers indicate increasing interannual trends in temperatures from 1999 through 2006 that correspond to increasing trends in the annual mean and annual maximum temperatures in the Columbia River of 0.07 and 0.17°C per year, respectively. These increases are within the natural variability of the river temperatures. There were no trends in the annual minimum river temperatures during the same period, and there were no trends in the annual minimum, mean, and maximum river temperatures from 1991 through 1998 and from 1991 through 2007.
Because most of the Lower and Combined Aquifers reached thermal equilibrium—defined by constant time lags between changes in river temperatures and subsequent changes in groundwater temperatures—prior to 1999 and seasonal pumpage patterns were relatively stable from 1999 through 2006, increasing interannual trends in groundwater temperatures are most likely explained by increasing trends in river temperatures.
Annual Maximum Well and River Temperatures
10
12
14
16
18
20
19991998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
AN
NU
AL
MA
XIM
UM
TEM
PERA
TURE
,IN
DEG
REES
CEL
SIU
S
RIV
RIV
CD10
CD10
CD47
CD47
CT3
CT3
TH5
TH5
LR2-W
LR2-W
TH1
TH1
TH4
TH4
TH6
TH6
TH7
TH7
TH8
TH8
TH9
TH9
Temperature probe in river
EXPLANATION
Temperature probe in Upper Aquifer or Clay Confining Unit
Temperature probe in Lower Aquifer or Combined Aquifer
Solid line indicates a time series with a statistically significant trend of increasing annual maximum temperatures (α=0.05): Dashed line indicates a time series with no statistically significant trend (α=0.05)
River Temperatures
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
WAT
ER T
E M
PERA
TURE
, IN
DEG
REES
CEL
SIUS
199519931991 19991997 2001 2003 2005 2007
MeanMinimum
MaximumAnnual water temperature Least-squares regression line of annual
maximum temperatures, 1999–2006
Least-squares regression line of annual mean temperatures, 1999–2006
Slope=0.07; r 2=0.56
Slope=0.17; r 2=0.61
Trends in Time Lags Between River and Well Temperatures
120°17'30" 120°17'
47°32'30"
47°32'
North Weir
South Weir
0 1,000FEET
0 300METERS
96 / 21 / 28
LR1LR2-E
LR2-W
TH5
TH4
TH2
RIV
TH8TH9TH7
TH1 CD47
CD6
CD10
SW14
SW13
SW11
CD8
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT1
CT3
CT2
CT4
TH6
150 / 123 / 96 193 / 142 / 145
67 / 44 / 47
55 / 49 / 53
37 / 2 / 1
119 / 82 / 65COLU
MBIA
RIV
ER
EXPLANATION
Subsurface cutoff wall
Statistically significant trend of decreasing time lag of annual minimum or maximum temperatures, 1991–98 (α=0.05)
No statistically significant trend of decreasing time lag of annual minimum or maximum temperatures, 1991–98 (α=0.05)
Well with time lag of annual maximum temperature in 1991 / 1999 / 2006, in days
Well, weir, or river site and nameLR1
55 / 49 / 53
α
α
Conceptual ModelAnalyses of water-level data collected on July 18, 2007, and dissolved-constituent and bacterial concentrations in samples collected August 20–22, 2007, showed that most of the water pumped by the hatchery (CT well field) recharges along the river at the generally shortest distance between the well field and the river. In addition, analyses of the historical groundwater temperature data showed that at historical pumping rates, water pumped by the hatchery recharged about 2 months prior to the time it was pumped from the aquifer.
Generalized Groundwater Flow Directions and Fluxes, 2007
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT1
CT3
CT2
CT4
North WeirSouth Weir
LR1LR2-E
LR2-W
TH6
TH5
TH4
TH2
RIV
TH8TH9
TH7
TH1
CD47
CD6CD10
SW14
SW13
SW11
CD8
Well, weir, or river site and site name
Subsurface cutoff wall
RW4
EXPLANATION
General groundwater flow direction in the Lower and Combined Aquifers—Arrow lengths represent relative flux
General location of groundwater divide
Well of CT well field
Well of RW well field
Extent of Lower and Combined Aquifers—Modified from Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc. (1990)
0 800FEET
0 200METERS
COLU
MBIA
RIV
ER
Distribution of Potassium and Live Bacterial Cells, August 20 –22, 2007
COLUMBIA RIVER
North WeirSouth Weir
LR1
LR2-ELR2-W
TH5
TH4TH2
RIV
TH8TH9
TH7
TH1CD47
CD6CD10
SW14
SW13
SW11
CD8
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT1
CT3
CT2
CT4
TH6COLUMBIA RIVER
Counts of live bacteriaper milliliter of water
Potassium, in milligrams per liter
120°17'30" 120°17' 120°17'30" 120°17'47°32'30"
47°32'
0.61
1.63
1.041.021.02
1.48
1.03
North WeirSouth Weir
LR1
LR2-ELR2-W
TH5
TH4TH2
RIV
TH8TH9TH7
TH1
CD47
CD6 CD10
SW14
SW13SW11
CD8
RW3
RW4
RW2
RW1
CT1
CT3
CT2CT4
TH6
1.02
1.611.201.03
Well, weir, or river site and site name
Subsurface cutoff wall
RW4
EXPLANATION
Sampling site—Number is concentration of potassiumor bacterial cells.4501,500
88,000
470
1,300
360390
800
290
<3
0 1,000FEET
0 300METERS
References CitedCH2M Hill, 1977, Wenatchee Regional Water Supply System predesign report (draft): Prepared for the City
of Wenatchee, Washington, about 150 p.
Tabor, R.W., Frizzell, V.A., Jr., Whetten, J.T., Waitt, R.B., Swanson, D.A., Byerly, G.R., Booth, D.B., Hetherington, M.J., and Zartman, R.E., 1987, Geologic map of the Chelan 30-minute by 60-minute quadrangle, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series I-1661, 1 plate.
van Heeswijk, Marijke, Cox, S.E., Huffman, R.L., and Curran, C.A, 2008, Conceptual model of hydrologic and thermal conditions of the Eastbank Aquifer System near Rocky Reach Dam, Douglas County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5071, 66 p.
Water & Environmental Systems Technology, Inc., 1990, Eastbank Hatchery pumping test and analysis, final report: Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington, about 200 p.
AcknowledgmentsWe thank the following PUD personnel for assistance with this study: Ian Adams, Dan Davies, and Sam Dilly for extensive assistance with compilation of data and information and help in the field, Travis Dolge, Tim Doneen, and Tom Whaley for help in the field, and Steve Hays for compilation of historical Rocky Reach Dam forebay temperatures. We also thank Mike Krautkramer and Jim Hay of Robinson, Noble, and Saltbush, Inc. for sharing data and information from their library, Kim deRubertis and Omar Fulton for sharing previous work, and Mike Cockrum, Regional Water Operator of the City of Wenatchee, for sharing historical pumpage data of the regional water system.
Contacts Marijke van Heeswijk, [email protected], (253) 552-1625 Stephen E. Cox, [email protected], (253) 552-1623
U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington 934 Broadway, Suite 300, Tacoma, Washington, 98402 http://wa.water.usgs.gov/
U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey April 2009
